These Light Bulbs Cause Anxiety, Migraines, and Even Cancer.
Many of us in the effort to save energy and money, replaced our old standard light bulbs with environmentally-friendly new generation energy saving light bulbs. However, the new generation of energy efficient light bulbs are so toxic that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency created an emergency protocol you need to follow in the event of a bulb breakage, due to the poison gas that is released. If broken indoors, these light bulbs release 20 times the maximum acceptable mercury concentration into the air, according to a study conducted by researchers from the Fraunhofer Wilhelm Klauditz Institute for German’s Federal Environment Agency.
Energy Efficient Light Bulbs Can Cause
Inability to concentrate
Energy Efficient Bulbs Cause Anxiety, Migraines, and Even Cancer. Reasons to Go Back To Incandescent Bulbs
Energy saving bulbs contain mercury. Mercury is a potent neurotoxin that is especially dangerous to children and pregnant women.
It is especially toxic to the brain, the nervous system, the liver and the kidneys. It can also damage the cardiovascular, immune and reproductive systems. It can lead to tremors, anxiety, insomnia, memory loss, headaches, cancer and Alzheimer’s.
Energy Saving Bulbs Can Cause Cancer
A new study performed by Peter Braun at Berlin Germany’s Alab Laboratory found these light bulbs contain poisonous carcinogens that could cause cancer.
Phenol – A mildly acidic toxic white crystalline solid, obtained from coal tar and used in chemical manufacture.
Naphthalene – A volatile white crystalline compound, produced by the distillation of coal tar, used in mothballs and as a raw material for chemical manufacture.
Styrene – An unsaturated liquid hydrocarbon, obtained as a petroleum byproduct.
Energy Saving Light Bulbs Emit a Lot of UV Rays
Energy saving lamps emit UV-B and traces of UV-C radiation. It is generally recognized that UV-radiation is harmful to the skin (can lead to skin cancer) and the eyes. The radiation from these bulbs directly attacks the immune system, and furthermore, damages the skin tissues enough to prevent the proper formation of vitamin D-3.
So despite the energy and cost savings, these light bulbs pose serious health risks and you may want to change back to regular incandescent bulbs. But be careful while doing so. If one happens to break, the dangers are so severe that the Environmental Protection Agency has laid out a very detailed protocol to deal with the mercury and cancer-causing chemicals, which you can read below:
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the following emergency procedure should be followed in the event of a bulb breakage, due to the poison gas that is released.
Have people and pets leave the room.
Air out the room for 5-10 minutes by opening a window or door to the outdoor environment.
Shut off the central forced-air heating/air-conditioning system, if you have one.
Stiff paper or cardboard
Damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes (for hard surfaces)
A glass jar with a metal lid or a sealable plastic bag.
DO NOT VACUUM. Vacuuming is not recommended unless broken glass remains after all other cleanup steps have been taken. Vacuuming could spread mercury-containing powder or mercury vapor.
Be thorough in collecting broken glass and visible powder.
Scoop up glass fragments and powder using stiff paper or cardboard. Use sticky tape, such as duct tape, to pick up any remaining small glass fragments and powder.
Place the used tape in the glass jar or plastic bag. See the detailed cleanup instructions for more information and for differences in cleaning up hard surfaces versus carpeting or rugs.
Place cleanup materials in a sealable container.
Promptly place all bulb debris and cleanup materials, including vacuum cleaner bags, outdoors in a trash container or protected area until materials can be disposed of. Avoid leaving any bulb fragments or cleanup materials indoors.
Next, check with your local government about disposal requirements in your area, because some localities require fluorescent bulbs (broken or unbroken) be taken to a local recycling center. If there is no such requirement in your area, you can dispose of the materials with your household trash.
If practical, continue to air out the room where the bulb was broken and leave the heating/air conditioning system shut off for several hours.
With all that being said, it’s best to replace this generation of light bulbs with standard ones before a dangerous accident happens.
Republican lawmakers are accusing the Obama administration of allowing countries like Russia, China and Iran to take control over the Internet. Their beef with the administration focuses on a relatively obscure nonprofit overseen by the U.S. government that is scheduled to become fully independent Saturday.
The organization is called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or ICANN for short. Its history traces back to a graduate student at UCLA named Jon Postel.
He started keeping track of the unique numbers assigned to particular computers using the Internet, during its early days. Jonathan Zittrain, an Internet law professor at Harvard, says Postel kept a clipboard to make sure no user had the same number — sort of like a phone book.
U.S. Prepares To Relinquish Oversight Of Internet To International Body
“It was just sort of an honor system that would stop Caltech from coming in, or Bulgaria, from saying, ‘You know what, we’re going to start using those numbers,’ ” Zittrain says. “It’s just something that would be a way of coordinating as people came online and needed to use numbers and, later, names.”
Today that function is done by ICANN, a nonprofit based in Los Angeles with a budget of more than $130 million and more than 350 employees. It keeps track of millions of websites all over the globe.
Since its founding in 1998, ICANN has been overseen by the U.S. Commerce Department. But the government contract ends on Sept. 30 and the Obama administration plans to let ICANN become fully independent.
Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas has waged a campaign against the transition that includes ominous sounding videos, in which he says that the phase-out of U.S. oversight will open the door to authoritarian governments taking control of the Internet.
“Russia, and China, and Iran don’t have a First Amendment,” Cruz says in one of the videos. “They don’t protect free speech, and they actively censor the Internet. ICANN could do the same thing, putting foreign countries in charge of what you can say online, prohibiting speech that they disagree with.”
Though ICANN oversees a fairly geeky administrative function, it does have an advisory panel that includes representatives of governments from all over the world. And there have been some dust-ups over the granting of new domain names, which has made some critics worry that ICANN is already being used to clamp down on speech.
Gay rights advocates have been trying to get approval for a .gay domain so that gay people all over the world can easily find resources. ICANN has been evaluating the requests for years, says Berin Szoka, president of the TechFreedom think tank that has opposed the transition. He says it’s not clear what’s really going on.
“It’s always going to be a little bit hazy. It’s going to be hard to actually know who’s really driving what,” Szoka says. “So here, for example, I guarantee you there are governments that have been exercising whatever influence they can to stop the creation of .gay.”
Advocates for ICANN’s independence say that there are a lot of safeguards in place to limit any government intrusion. The organization’s global board is made up of business, nonprofit and academic leaders. The rules make it hard for governments to exert that much influence.
And, Harvard’s Zittrain says, governments that want to censor the Internet already do so in much more effective ways: “There are so many other paths that the Russians or the Chinese could take and have taken to make sure that their citizens or even people around the world can’t see stuff that they don’t want them to see.”
He points out that despite Cruz calling the transition “a radical proposal,” the U.S. government has been planning to fully privatize ICANN for years — going back to the Clinton administration, continuing with George W. Bush and now Obama.
The plan’s supporters argue that not completing the phase-out could undermine U.S. credibility. “There are people who will argue that if we don’t give it up that we have bad motives,” Michael Chertoff, former Homeland Security secretary under George W. Bush and Obama, told the AP.
Zittrain thinks Republicans are politicizing this to attack the president. “It’s a little strange to see people who have been vocal about getting the government out of content-based decisions insisting that the government remain in the position of wielding a veto over some aspect of the flow of bits online,” he says.
Cruz had pushed to include a provision to preserve U.S. oversight of ICANN into the Senate’s spending bill, but the legislation’s most recent version didn’t include it. He is now urging House Republicans to take up the cause.
And though Cruz and Donald Trump have their differences, last week the Republican nominee came out in support of Cruz’s efforts to stop the transition.
Election officials in Franklin County, Ohio are reportedly stumped over what one maintenance worker found in a dilapidated downtown Columbus warehouse earlier this week.
According to sources, Randall Prince, a Columbus-area electrical worker, was doing a routine check of his companies wiring and electrical systems when he stumbled across approximately one dozen black, sealed ballot boxes filled with thousands of Franklin County votes for Hillary Clinton and other Democrat candidates.
“No one really goes in this building. It’s mainly used for short-term storage by a commercial plumber,” Prince said.
So when Prince, who is a Trump supporter, saw several black boxes in an otherwise empty room, he went to investigate. What he found could allegedly be evidence of a massive operation designed to deliver Clinton the crucial swing state.
Prince, shown here, poses with his find, as election officials investigate.
Early voting does not begin in Ohio until October 12, so no votes have officially been cast in the Buckeye state. However, inside these boxes were, what one source described as, “potentially tens of thousands of votes” for Hillary Clinton.
Christian Times Newspaper has not yet been able to obtain a photocopy of one of the ballots found inside the box, but an affiliate in Ohio passed along a replica of what was found.
It is important to note that the above replica coincides with a ballot that a Franklin County voter would cast at the polling place on Election Day, meaning the Clinton campaign’s likely goal was to slip the fake ballot boxes in with the real ballot boxes when they went to official election judges on November 8th.
Ohio, a perennial swing state in the presidential election, has been a challenge for Clinton and her Democrat counterparts in 2016. Many national Democrat groups have pulled funding from the state entirely, in order to redirect it to places in which they are doing better.
Clinton herself has spent less time in Ohio, and spent less money, in recent weeks as it has appeared that Trump will carry the crucial state.
With this find, however, it now appears that Clinton and the Democrat Party planned on stealing the state on Election Day, making any campaigning there now a waste of time.
This story is still developing, and CTN will bring you more when we have it.
UPDATE: 5:53pm EDT: A Texas federal judge Friday denied (PDF) a request by Arizona, Nevada, Oklahoma, and Texas to block the US from ceding the Internet’s root zone oversight duties to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. Unless a higher court intervenes, the changeover will begin tonight at midnight EDT.
Remember the projected Y2K bug disaster? The world’s computers would supposedly go haywire as the clock ticked to January 1, 2000, thus destroying the world and ensuing widespread panic. Didn’t happen. Fast forward to today, however, and another doomsday scenario is afoot (albeit with much less fanfare).
If many politicians are to be believed, an Internet disaster is set to commence this Saturday. That’s when a tiny branch of the US Commerce Department officially hands over its oversight of the Internet’s “address book” or root zone—the highest level of the domain naming system (DNS) structure—to a nonprofit, a Los Angeles-based body called the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN).
Calling it an “Internet giveaway,” many Republican lawmakers tried to block the changeover, a transition that is strongly supported by the President Barack Obama administration and by Internet giants like Facebook and Google.
“Today our country faces a threat to the Internet as we know it… If Congress fails to act, the Obama administration intends to give away the Internet to an international body akin to the United Nations,” said lawmaker Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) in a recent speech on the Senate floor. “I rise today to discuss the significant, irreparable damage this proposed Internet giveaway could wreak not only on our nation but on free speech across the world.”
The campaign of Donald Trump, the GOP presidential candidate, offered similar words:
“The Republicans in Congress are admirably leading a fight to save the Internet this week, and need all the help the American people can give them to be successful. Congress needs to act, or Internet freedom will be lost for good, since there will be no way to make it great again once it is lost.”
But ICANN, the Commerce Department, and plenty of others, have scoffed at the assertion made by Cruz, Trump, and countless others.
“The US government has never, and has never had the ability to, set the direction of the (ICANN) community’s policy development work based on First Amendment ideas,” ICANN said in a statement. “Yet that is exactly what Senator Cruz is suggesting. The US government has no decreased role. Other governments have no increased role. There is simply no change to governmental involvement in policy development work in ICANN.”
Cruz has a scary looking website with a countdown clock leading to October 1. With the changeover imminent, US lawmakers have been haggling over the issue all week. Some, like Cruz, have even attempted to slip language barring the transition into legislation for continuing to fund the US government. But late Wednesday, that attempt failed. Conveniently, the government’s fiscal year ends September 30, the same day the Commerce Department’s oversight of the global DNS is terminated.
One other hurdle remains. A last-minute federal lawsuit (PDF) brought by Arizona, Nevada, Oklahoma, and Texas. The attorneys general for those states are seeking a court order from a federal judge to block the move. A hearing has been set for Friday afternoon. “Trusting authoritarian regimes to ensure the continued freedom of the Internet is lunacy,” Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general, said.
Overall opposition to the transition appears to be largely political. Many GOP lawmakers (and the Trump campaign) are seemingly arguing that without US oversight, foreign governments or hacking groups from the Internet’s dark corners might take over, control the Internet, and censor it dramatically. What’s more, these critics suggest that without US oversight, the Internet’s infrastructure might crumble entirely. The World Wide Web would be left in a state of anarchy.
That simply isn’t true. Ask other US officials, tech companies, or even Internet architects who helped build the current system, and they’ll say the US government’s oversight role of the Internet is too small for such doomsday scenarios to occur. In fact, these proponents of the transition even say that leaving the root zone under US control could cause more harm than good in the long run.
Rhetoric aside, US retains vast Internet control
Regardless of who’s right or wrong in the ICANN changeover debate, one thing nobody can deny is that the United States will continue exercising a powerful hold over a great swath of the Internet—evenunder the transition. That’s because the companies that oversee the world’s most popular top-level domains (.com, .org, and .net) are based in the United States. These organizations must follow US law and abide by US court orders, and they have to remove websites from the global Internet when ordered to do so.
To date, these court orders are how the US government has seized thousands of websites it has declared to be breaking laws about intellectual property, drugs, gambling, and you name it. Kim Dotcom’s Megaupload file-sharing site fell because of this in 2012. The Bodog online sports wagering site was shuttered by the US that same year even though that .com domain was purchased with a Canadian register.
What’s more, even when a domain is registered under a handle that is outside of the United States’ official jurisdiction, the US government has international cooperation agreements with many countries that require foreign registries to abide by US directives. The most high-profile case of this kind was this summer’s shuttering of one of the world’s most notorious file-sharing sites—KAT.cr, or the KickassTorrents website. While the site had been playing a game of Internet domain Whac-a-mole to retain a leg up on global intellectual property authorities, it was registered with the .cr domain by the Costa Rican register called NIC when it was shuttered at the request of the US. The site’s alleged operator was arrested in July in Poland and charged by US authorities with varying criminal copyright infringement counts.
The US often leaves a landing page on shuttered sites notifying Web surfers that sites were “seized pursuant to an order issued by a US District Court.” Whether you call it censorship or just following the law, countries across the globe have similar domain-seizing powers that won’t be disturbed by the ICANN changeover.
The fact that .com, .net, and .org sites are run by US-based companies isn’t trivial, either. Verisign, of Virginia, maintains the global DNS Internet root zone system at the center of the ICANN transition debate, and the company has an indefinite contractual right from ICANN to manage the globe’s .com and .net domains. About 127 million of the world’s 334 million top-level domain name registrations worldwide are .com, according to Verisign. The .net domain comes in fifth place worldwide, and .org is sixth place. The .org domain is operated by the Public Interest Registry, also of Virginia.
So what is this ICANN transition about?
The most simple answer is that a branch of the US Commerce Department will no longer have technical oversight of a contract (PDF) with ICANN and Verisign over the maintenance of the Internet’s DNS. Just like its endless deal to manage .com and .net, ICANN has already ceded Verisign the indefinite contractual rights (PDF) to manage the global Internet’s DNS root zone. Verisign can only lose the rights to renew these contracts if it doesn’t perform.
At its most basic level, the DNS allows Internet surfers to input “arstechnica.com” into a Web browser to render the Ars news site. Absent such a coordinated, worldwide naming system, Internet surfers would have to type in Ars’ real IP address: (220.127.116.11). Verisign said its DNS average daily query load was approximately 130 billion queries for the second quarter of 2016, up 17 percent year over year. (Verisign declined to comment for this story.)
ICANN was created in 1998 to take over the job of essentially a single person, Jon Postel, who is now deceased and was often referred to as the “God of the Internet.” He had run the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA). That agency (PDF) was consumed by the US National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), a branch of the US Commerce Department. The NTIA says it only has a “procedural role” in approving zone changes, and the group says it has been planning to remove itself from this role for nearly two decades in order to cede that responsibility to ICANN, which has an organizational chart that would put most private industry to shame.
Essentially, this oversight is all that is left of the US government’s control of the DNS. Under the transition, the feds will no longer have that role when October begins.
Here’s what the NTIA told Ars in a recent e-mail:
The IANA transition is the final step in a nearly 20-year process to privatize the Internet domain name system. Two years ago, NTIA announced it would transition our stewardship role related to the Internet domain name system to the Internet multistakeholder community, which includes businesses, technical experts, academics, civil society groups, and other stakeholders. This move will help ensure that the stakeholders who own and operate, transact business, and exchange information over the myriad of networks that comprise the Internet will continue to make decisions about the technical underpinnings of the Internet just as they do today. The transition will help preserve and strengthen this multistakeholder approach that has helped make the Internet an engine for economic growth, innovation, and free expression.
Government-speak aside, here’s what’s really happening: when there is a root zone change request from a domain registry, for example, this needs to be approved by the Commerce Department’s NTIA “before Verisign can act on it,” Akram Atallah, ICANN’s president of the global domains division, told Ars in a recent interview.
“In reality, the only thing that really changes is that NTIA will no longer approve these changes. We will send them to Verisign, and Verisign will have to update the root zone,” he said.
According to Atallah, the system works like this: suppose the operator of the .ru domain in Russia, or Egypt’s .eg, wants to add an IP address to a new server or wants to change an IP address because a server went down. He said the operators of those domains would send ICANN a request “to add a root zone file change,” which is essentially a change in the global Internet address book. This same thing needs to happen when new generic, top-level domains are rolled out, such as .store or .book and dozens of others.
“We send this to Verisign to put in the root zone file. NTIA has to approve this action before Verisign can update the root zone file,” Atallah said, explaining how the system works under the Commerce Department’s oversight.
For its part, NTIA explains its oversight role as this: ICANN comes to NTIA with a root zone change request. NTIA verifies that ICANN followed established protocol for that change, and then NTIA authorizes the root zone change. NTIA’s briefing paper (PDF) about the DNS oversight role it is ceding is public and explains things in more granular detail.
In all, the NTIA signed off on 1,513 root zone changes last year. This year, there have been 1,051 so far.
“The US government was really never very hands on in terms of its oversight,” said Jeremy Malcolm, a policy analyst with the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “Someone had to be there to make sure that the right processes were being followed so the organization could run. Its role was not of how it runs, but of ensuring it runs true to its founding objectives and that it remains accountable and transparent.”
Atallah believes ICANN is now ready to take over that role. “We have tested and demonstrated that we can do this,” he said. And Atallah thinks it makes good business sense for Verisign to enjoy an indefinite contract, which includes a maximum $7.85 for each .com registration. Under a competitive landscape, he said, companies may not want to go the extra mile, “because they have no assurances if they invest heavily in the business they will be able to reap the benefits.”
Atallah said both Verisign and the NTIA have to follow the contractual rules, meaning that neither the NTIA nor Verisign has the power to act on its own—preventing things like unilaterally meddling with the Internet’s DNS zoning system to comport with their own wills. For that matter, ICANN must follow its own rules, too, and it cannot cede to pressure from any single government. For example, the US government tried to exert its power over ICANN to block it from implementing the .xxx domain, but ICANN approved it anyway in 2011.
Yesterday, we saw that the media was reporting a mass-shooting by a dot-Indian immigrant as a White Supremacist Neo-Nazi terrorist attack. That they were all lying, in concert and on purpose in order to push an anti-White narrative.
In this video, Joey demonstrates just how insane the media narrative on Black Lives Matter is – how they are just openly lying to us about what is going on.
First, he goes to a White neighborhood with a “Black Lives Matter” sign, and people respond mostly negatively, saying that it excludes the lives of other races.
This is the White mindset – “we should all be equal, people should be judged as individuals.” That is due to our having evolved in a high-trust society, where you had to deal with people on a one-to-one level, instead of on the level of groups. This aspect of our basic nature is what has been exploited by the Jews to push an “anti-racist” agenda.
Still, we see that most Whites are not comfortable with the racial revolutionary agenda of Blacks, which is different than what the media presents to us.
Joey then goes to a Black neighborhood and holds up an “All Lives Matter” sign, and is repeatedly attacked, physically. At one point he is told that only Black lives matter. He is also told that “they’re killing us everyday.”
This shows that “Black Lives Matter” is nothing more than an aggressive “Black power”-type slogan, which is not what the media is telling us.
It also demonstrates the way the minds of Blacks are being exploited by the Jew media.
Firstly, Blacks are collectivist in nature, due to their evolution which required them to identify strongly as members of a group. In Africa, small groups of people would be constantly at war with other small groups of people. So, they are told that their group is being attacked, and this resonates with them very easily.
The second thing being exploited is the extremely low intelligence of Blacks. They are incapable of critical thought or analysis, so they believe things that are obviously untrue, such as that Whites are just killing them at random.
None of what we see in this video reflects what we are being told by the Jewish media.
In fact, it is the opposite. What the Jewish media is telling us is that Whites who are against Black lives matter are against racial equality, while the Blacks who support the movement are only asking for equality.
This Wednesday’s “Modern Family” will include an openly transgender child actor.
In the upcoming episode — entitled “A Stereotypical Day” — parents Cameron “Cam” (Eric Stonestreet) and Mitchell (Jesse Tyler Ferguson) permit their daughter Lily (Aubrey Anderson-Emmons) to have her transgender friend Tom over for a play-date. Both parents are filled with pride that they have done well in raising an accepting and open-minded child. But that pride quickly diminishes when Lily insults her friend, which they use as a teachable moment.
Lily’s playmate Tom will be played by 8-year-old transgender actor Jackson Millarker.
Ryan Case, who directed “A Stereotypical Day, posted this shot of Millarker on set. “This is Jackson Millarker,” Case announced. He’s 8 years old, from Atlanta, and just happens to be transgender. He plays Lily’s friend Tom in this week’s Modern Family and he’s wonderful. One of the many reasons I love being a part of this show.”
“Modern Family” has had 77 Emmy nominations and taken home 22 of the awards. The ABC sitcom is tied with “Frasier” for most wins in the Outstanding Comedy Series category (2010-2014). “Modern Family” premiered in Sept. 23, 2009. It’s currently in it’s eighth season.
Other shows that have transgender characters on screen played by transgender actors include “Orange Is The New Black” and “Nashville,” but in adult roles, not child roles. Transgender teen Jazz Jennings, 15, has her own reality show on TLC, “I Am Jazz.”
Jeffrey Tambor plays a transgender character on “Transparent,” but wants to see more trans actors in trans roles. “I would not be unhappy if I were the last cisgender male to play a female transgender on television,” the actor said during his Emmy acceptance speech earlier this month.
“A Stereotypical Day” will air on Wednesday at 9/8c on ABC.
On Saturday afternoon, California Gov. Jerry Brown signed an historic anti-boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) bill,Assembly Bill 2844, into law, effectively barring companies that engage in discrimination against any sovereign state — including the Jewish state of Israel — from doing business with the Golden State.
The bill, which was introduced by Assemblyman Richard Bloom (D-Santa Monica), and co-authored by Assemblyman Travis Allen (R-Huntington Beach), had overwhelmingly passed in both houses of the legislature last month. California’s State Senate approved the bill by a vote of 34 to 1 on August 24, and the State Assembly passed it by 69 to 1 six days later.
Many different groups reacted by lauding the anti-BDS bill. The Simon Wiesenthal Center hailed Brown.
“Every defeat of the global BDS movement is an investment for peace and is a powerful blow against extremists. This victory is especially meaningful as it comes from America’s leading state,” Rabbi Abraham Cooper, the Associate Dean of the leading Jewish Human Rights NGO, said in a statement released from Jerusalem.
Cooper added, “More and more, BDS is being exposed as a cynical, hypocritical, anti-peace vendetta that seeks to demonize the Jewish state and all supporters of Zion. The Wiesenthal Center is committed to battle against BDS on campuses, churches, and in the halls of power.”
The Israeli-American Coalition for Action also issued a statement praising Brown for implementing the historic legislation.
“We applaud Governor Brown for signing this groundbreaking legislation,” said Shawn Evenhaim, Chairman of IAC for Action. “This new law sends a strong message that the state of California will accept its responsibility to protect its residents from the systemic hate and discrimination spread by the BDS movement and its proponents.”
The only two legislators to vote against AB 2844 were Democrats. They were Sen. Bill Monning (D-Carmel) in the state Senate, and Assemblyman Mark Stone (D-Monterey).
Follow Adelle Nazarian on Twitter and Periscope @AdelleNaz
“In recent years, Republicans have made inroads into the overwhelmingly Democratic constituency of American Jews. But this year, Republican Jews — or Jewish donors to the Republican party, at least — are abandoning their party’s nominee at a stunningly high rate.
In 2012, 71 percent of the $240 million that Jewish donors gave to the two major-party nominees went to President Obama’s re-election campaign; 29 percent went to Mitt Romney’s campaign, according to our analysis of campaign contributors, which used a predictive model to estimate which donors are Jewish based on their names and other characteristics. This ratio of support mirrors how Jewish voters cast their ballots in 2012.
So far in 2016, of all the money given to major-party candidates by donors who appear to be Jewish, 96 percent has gone to Hillary Clinton and just 4 percent has gone to Donald Trump. …”
“The Las Vegas billionaire Sheldon G. Adelson and his wife are giving more than $40 million to groups backing Republican congressional candidates, according to campaign filings and interviews with Republican strategists, disregarding repeated entreaties for support from allies of Donald J. Trump and dealing a major setback to Mr. Trump’s efforts to rally the deepest-pocketed Republican givers.
The contributions will again make Mr. Adelson and his family among the largest known donors in American politics, after several years in which they played a more subdued role in national Republican fund-raising. But Mr. Adelson’s decision to deploy his wealth down ballot, less than two months before Election Day, also reflects the reluctance of most of the biggest Republican donors to invest in their party’s standard-bearer. …
Two Republicans with knowledge of his giving said that Mr. Adelson was allocating a far smaller sum, $5 million, to benefit the top of the Republican ticket: token support by Mr. Adelson’s standards. And in a striking move, the money will go not to any of the pro-Trump super PACs but to organizations controlled by a fellow billionaire, Joe Ricketts, a Wyoming investor, whose own political operation will decide how to spend it. The Ricketts family spent millions of dollars during the primaries to defeat Mr. Trump, who responded with a Twitter message that the Rickettses “better be careful, they have a lot to hide!”